High Court · 2025

Shri Dushyant Mainali and t he learned Deput y Advocat e General Shri J.S. Virk.

2. Pet it ioner has filed t he present writ pet it ion for t he following reliefs: - “ i) I ssue a writ , order or direct ion in t he nat ur e of m andam us dir ect ing and com m anding t he Dist rict Magist rat e, Nainit al/ respondent no.3 and t he Dist rict Social Welfare Officer , Nainit al- r espondent no.5 t o fort hwit h decide t he applicat ion of t he pet it ioner for appoint m ent of lim it ed guardianship in favour of Mr s. Manisha Choudhary independent ly upon t he m erit s wit hout being influenced by t he opinions and prej udices 1 of t he pet it ioner’s fat her and brot her s. ii) I ssue a writ , order or direct ion in t he nat ur e of m andam us dir ect ing and com m anding t he Dist rict Magist rat e, Nainit al- respondent no.3 and t he Senior Superint endent of Police, Nainit al- r espondent no.4 t o ensur e t hat t he pet it ioner’s right s under law are prot ect ed.”

3. Learned counsel for t he pet it ioner subm it s t hat t he pet it ioner is suffering from m ult iple disabilit ies and as t he disabilit y cert ificat e issued by t he Medical Aut horit ies t he pet it ioner is having 100% perm anent hearing and speech disabilit y, because of which t he pet it ioner needs t o t ake assist ance of a sign language int erpret er for com m unicat ion.

4. He furt her subm it s t hat , when t he pet it ioner was m inor, fat her of t he pet it ioner had sworn an affidavit of aut horit y for pet it ioner ’s care and had given perm ission t o t he caregiver of t he pet it ioner, nam ely, Ms. Sat rupa Kagel D/ o Murray Kagel, R/ o 421 Geronim a Lane, Taos, New Mexico, USA; t hat wit h t he help of caregiver Ms. Sat rupa Kagel t he pet it ioner got adm ission in several schools for t he Deaf and she com plet ed her educat ion up t o 7 t h st andard from Abhilasha Vidyalaya, Udaipur. 2

5. Learned counsel t he pet it ioner furt her subm it s t hat , due t o her ill healt h and st at us as a foreign nat ional, Ms. Sat rupa Kagel had given her consent for t he care of t he pet it ioner t o be ent rust ed t o Mrs. Manisha Choudhary W/ o Sri Mangli Prasad, R/ o Ganesh Nagar Colony, Ward No.19, I t arasi, M.P.; t hat t he daught er of Mrs. Manisha Choudhary is also a disabled child and has com plet ed educat ion up t o 7 t h st andard from t he sam e I nst it ut e from where t he pet it ioner got educat ion; t hat , t he pet it ioner being m aj or had subm it t ed an applicat ion u/ s 14 of t he Right s of Persons wit h Disabilit ies Act , 2016 before t he Dist rict Magist rat e, Nainit al for appoint m ent of lim it ed guardianship favour of Mrs. Manisha Choudhary, which was forwarded t o t he Dist rict Social Welfare Officer, Nainit al, however, no decision has been t aken on t he sam e t ill dat e.

6. The pet it ioner Km . Neha Bhat t , Ms. Sat rupa Kagel and Mrs. Manisha Choudhary are present virt ually. Mr. Digvij ay Sharm a, I nt erpret er appoint ed by Ms. Sat rupa Kagel is also present virt ually. Respondent no.7 Kailash Chandra Bhat t is present in person before t he Court wit h his son Mr. Sanj ay Bhat t .

7. We have int eract ed wit h respondent no.7- 3 fat her and brot her of t he pet it ioner, who subm it s t hat t hey have no obj ect ion if lim it ed guardianship of t he pet it ioner is given t o Mrs. Manisha Choudhary. We have int eract ed wit h Mrs. Manisha Choudhary, who confirm ed her willingness t o accept t he lim it ed guardianship of t he pet it ioner.

8. I n view of t he above, writ pet it ion is disposed of direct ing t he Dist rict Magist rat e, Nainit al t o consider and decide t he applicat ion m ade by t he pet it ioner for lim it ed guardianship in favour of Mrs. Manish Choudhary, wit hin a period of one week from t oday.

9. We also direct t he Dist rict Social Welfare Officer, Nainit al t o consider t he case of t he pet it ioner for grant of benefit of various schem es fram ed by t he St at e Governm ent for persons wit h disabilit ies.

10. I t is also subm it t ed by t he learned counsel for t he pet it ioner t hat t he pet it ioner had been receiving a disabilit y pension when she was m inor, but aft er at t aining m aj orit y, t he pension has been discont inued. Thus, t he pet it ioner has also subm it t ed an online applicat ion before t he Dist rict Social Welfare Depart m ent for rest orat ion of t he pension; however, t he sam e is also pending 4 considerat ion.

11. I n t hat view, t he Dist rict Social Welfare Officer, Nainit al is direct ed t o look int o t he applicat ion of t he pet it ioner for grant of disabilit y pension and t o decide t he sam e wit hin a period of t wo weeks.

12. Writ pet it ion st ands ordered, accordingly.

13. There shall be no order as t o cost s.

14. Pending applicat ions, if any, also st and disposed of accordingly. ( G. N A REN D A R, C. J.) ( SUBH A SH UPA D H YA Y, J.) Dat ed: 18.11.2025 R/ SS RAJINI GUSAIN DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=97cfa6e4cbd49c07b876db48448a c3701a9ae475a2547e4b7f1d9b1f17d01342 , postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=8D039BC77BD1A2222B4DF4 FC80D4557562F95BEBA013F530616A158A 0A878BD8, cn=RAJINI GUSAIN 5